#tais thoughts

[endlesslyhyperfixating]

Sydcarmy vs Clairecarmy shot type, script, and relationship differences.

I was watching some clips I had for an edit I was working on and then I realized some interesting things about the shot sizes and types used In Carmen's interactions with Claire and Sydney, and the differences between u which can be argued to further push the Sydcarmy agenda. So... Let me cook.

Claire and Carmy

Their INFAMOUS close up shots are often talked about among the fandom. These scenes are often viewed as imposing, absorbing, intrusive and sharp. This shot type is often in their scenes together after medium double shots or over the shoulder shots.

Their initial meeting is quick-cut to these close ups, mirroring how their relationship and connection is brought about. A simple accidental meeting (alternating single medium shots) straight- almost immediately - to these really intense close-ups that, even to people who don't like to analyze these things, felt really affected by.

The cinematography regarding their connection is quick to be close, some would even say too close, and I believe this is meant to reflect their exact relationship.

Let's discuss their "intimate" or "cute" scene at the party in season 2 episode 5. (I cut off the rest of their dialogue because I wanted to discuss/analyze the shot and cinematography choices mostly

- slow push in during initial dialogue about Carmens fake party persona, Logan. (Whom @yannaryartside has discussed EXTENSIVELY and always eats about so I won't go too deep about that just yet but check 'em out.)

- cut-to close up after Carmen attempts to make a genuine observation about Claire's character.

What's the effect?

The initial choice to start this scene off with a slow push into their dialogue gives a personal, real feel. Like you're really there at the party. This makes sense with their topic of discussion at the time, Carmen going along with this fake persona he's adopted at this party.

Then, Carmy changes the subject, trying to make a 'genuine' observation about who Claire is, who he thinks he is.

Carm: "With Kelly, you're really good at that."

Claire: "good at what?"

Carm: "uh... Listening"

But let's think about that observation real quick, it was pretty much fed to him, just like everything else he has ever known about Claire. He sees the image of her his family laid out of her, and now he's seeing this image of a caretaker and listener that she has put out for him. Or, rather, literally made a whole outing with him about, basically saying "lets go to a party so you can watch me comfort my sad friend."

I digress, paired with this dialogue, the slow push in is intentional, to set that kind of real connection and build up a good relationship would have. But then...

Cut to a close up of Claire at his observation. She goes on further to tell him about how in college she was the one that everyone went to and that she would take care of when intoxicated. Not only does this jump straight into the image that's been created and upheld by others of Claire for Carmy, but it also skips a good chunk of the way they could have gotten there from continuing its slow push in. The cut to Claire’s close-up feels like it’s reinforcing the manufactured, performative aspect of her persona. She’s always already presenting an image of herself and the one that Carmy’s been fed by others, and now he's seeing her perform it for him. There’s no real room for them to discover who each other truly are beneath the surface. They get pushed(heh) into that “perfect” intimacy too quickly, (hence the ungodly amount of close ups) and everything gets rushed and artificial. The choice to make their interaction so loose and slow and intentional, to tight and suffocating, cutting to close-ups where Claire is the one “listening” or “comforting,” reinforces how his perception of her has been shaped by external factors rather than his own emotional processing. (Also, kinda wanna talk about how in the clip above you hear the inflection of Carmy's line when he says "listening" goes up, sort of sounding like a question. Does he really know if she's good at listening or is that just what he's been told? Is that just what he's been shown? It sounds like he's questioning whether she is really a good listener or not)

The nature of Clairecarmy cinematography is supposed to be rushed, invading and almost immature, just like them.

As opposed to

Sydney and Carmy

For Sydcarmy, we'll talk about The Table Scene (cue the "oh brother"'s) - sorry I had to speed it up it's a VERY LONG SLOW PUSH

The table scene features a (very) long push-in on Carms and Sydney's interaction under the table with no cuts or major changes in their positions. This scene is often seen as one of the most intimate within this show. It's a real intimacy, as opposed to the contrived "intimacy" we see in clips of Claire and Carmy, where even their dialogue doesn't serve their connection and deepening it as much as the shot types they get do.

Let's discuss the differences between the table scene and the party scene.

That table scene is a chef’s kiss example for tension* in cinematography.

*fun, emotional, and genuine tension, maybe even sexual and romantic, but not malicious

The slow push-in during the Sydney and Carmy's conversation is such a stark contrast to the Claire-Carmy moments. Where Claire and Carmy’s shots are invasive and rushed, Sydney and Carmy’s are carefully measured, building that slow tension that just eats at you. Which is deliberate, of course, as everything with this show is. (Also remember how I brought up the questioning infliction in Carmy's 'observation' he made about Claire? Here, he makes a standing observation about Sydney without any unknowingness. "You like taking care of people." It's resounding. It's real. It's not contrived intimacy, it's natural.)

It's a direct contrast to any scenes of "intimacy" between Carmen and Claire. Just thinking about any scene of them together, there are quick cuts, quick close-ups and shot types that read intimacy parked with dialogue that... Doesn't.

Sydney and Carmy's scenes usually feature these slow push in's, but especially so for the table scene. Just like mentioned with the previous scene, this is supposed to be a reflection of their connection and relationship.

There's a lot of distance in the beginning, a slow, slow push in is like their slow connection building. Not only is this deliberate to bring us as the viewers closer to them, but to bring these characters closer together as well. These cinematography choices are made along with dialogue that is actually intimate rather than cheaply contrived to trick the viewer into believing it is real intimacy (like with almost every Claire and Carmy scene)

Then, there's a still moment in the middle of the push inwards, around when the wide shot becomes a medium. This may be supposed to signify that for them to grow closer, there will be some resistance to face there. Stagnation. This period could possibly be equivalent to season three? That was Carmen's stagnant and regressive state where he began to relive and react his traumas, making Sydney step back. In this moment as the shot stills Carmen's eyes are on Sydney. Just as he always keeps an eye on her. Reminds me of something from season three...

Then the still is broken and we get more of a push in, into an almost close-up, until they both exit from under the table.

This could mean a lot of things in the context of the cinematography reflecting their relationship. But the one that makes the most sense, (and that we pretty much already know) is that

They're both resistant to getting close. But they still want to be there for each other.

Cinematography and shot speaking, the moment ending mid-push felt abrupt. It felt like it could have gotten closer, but it didn't. The intimacy of the moment caught up with both of them, making their clean transition to a more stable position and a still shot type. (Above is a double cowboy shot - waist up, more comfortable[?])

But, script wise, it was a fully realized and well executed moment, that had a beginning middle and end. Their talk was real and cherished, transitioning to another moment where they share that they are not alone. This idea of leaving each other alone is, and becomes a very important motif throughout the series.

The flow of the cinematography differing from the flow of the script is not a mistake or a fluke. I believe that this is all completely intentional.

To us, we hear and we see the intimacy and the connection between these two. We heard their professions, and reassurances and their devotions to one another. What we're shown through the cinematography is a slowly building connection, that takes pauses at times, that has moments of stillness, but continues to push grow and learn alongside each other. We know, just as they know, that there is something there between them, and the transition from under the table to over it is reflective of their resistance. We don't really have those sort of close-up moments between Carm and Syd.

This is sort of saying, if we want to get them to let themselves get close to each other, they need to let it happen.

SO. To sum it up...

Clairecarmy scenes are feigning intimacy and faking the "build" to their connection - really just cutting straight to it

Sydcarmy scenes are real and hold a genuine intimacy between the two, but the only thing keeping it from being a fully realized relationship or connection is themselves. They need to let the build-up happen (because it does) and they need to let each other in(close-up to each other)

[malinaa]

if i think about the hunger games in peeta's perspective i WILL start sobbing

[27spoons]

i think the most unrealistic part of yellowjackets is that the girls haven't experimented with each other

like wdym

ur trapped in the middle of nowhere with no connection to civilization

odds are ur gonna die

everyone on the team is objectively hot asf ok (cue that one deleted line of nat saying that they all have nice tits or something like that)

I DOUBT jackie and travis were the only virgins. like ur telling me no one else is like "I can't die a virgin"???????

yall saw how horny mari and nat were on DAY 3. for TRAVIS. ur telling me by winter they arent more unhinged???? bffr

like you cant tell me that almost every relationship in the teen timeline is borderline homoerotic and only two of the girls have canonically boned

in conclusion: yall have literally eaten ppl. go down on each other. u guys r always fighting. like goddamn. if u just fucked already maybe u would stop

[artificialroux]

tai literally begging for help from van as other tai switches back is so fucking scary. genuinely. gave me chills.

[moonagedaydreamsofrhiannon]

Perhaps the wilderness in Yellowjackets is not just a symbol of death. Perhaps it is also—in its own way—freedom.

In the wilderness, Lottie didn’t have to hide her visions for fear of being called crazy. She was exalted as a leader and a prophet. But when she returned, they called her crazy and locked her up.

In the wilderness, Misty didn’t have to be ashamed of her intensity and eccentricity. She was helpful, she was needed, she was important. But when she returned, they called her a freak and exiled her once again.

In the wilderness, Tai didn’t have to pretend to be something she’s not. Her other self was not a weakness but a strength, it gave her power, and kept her alive. But when she returned she had to suppress her urges and hide her other self, or lose everything.

In the wilderness, Shauna didn’t have to be small, and hide the fire inside her. She was angry, and violent, and powerful. But when she returned, she was forced back into a supporting role, forced to contain her darkness and her drive in order to fit a role she never wanted to play.

In the wilderness, Travis didn’t have to put on an act to fit the societal expectations of masculinity. He was feminine, and emotional, and soft—not the man of the group, but just another Yellowjacket in the hive. But when he returned, he was forced back into the cage—back into the closet—isolated, hardened, closed off and separated from the girls once more.

In the wilderness, Natalie didn’t have to feel guilty for surviving. She was the hunter, the provider, and the gun in her hands made her a savior, and a leader, not a killer. But when she returned, she was a killer once again, haunted by guilt, and outcast by society for the things she did to stay alive.

The wilderness gave them the freedom to be their truest and most authentic selves, but the cost was the blood spilled. The cost was their old selves. The cost was a place in the world upon their return.

Maybe the wilderness did not destroy them; it simply changed them into something new, something irrevocably different, something that would never—could never—fit back inside the narrow box of their old lives, and because they could no longer fit, society called them broken.

The wilderness freed them, but it never let them go. Because once you’ve tasted flesh and blood, once you’ve stared death in the face and overcame, once you’ve been to the very brink and seen the true depth of your own capacity for violence, once all the former markers of morality and success have become meaningless, in a world where survival at all costs is the only law, how can you ever go back to a world ruled by pointless, hollow, conventions? Once you’ve shed every remnant of your humanity, once you’ve run with the wolves, and howled at the moon, and become one with the ancient wild gods, how can you ever be a human again? Once you’ve had a taste of complete freedom, how can you ever be satisfied with a fake, insignificant, half-life, made up entirely of half-truths and haunting?

[alicentsgf]

melissa and shauna both read each other to filth honestly like yes shauna you are a paranoid bitch who creates your own demons and yes melissa you are a crazy stalker for marrying the daughter of the woman you killed. like where do we even go from here maybe you guys should make out abt it or something idk

[sukibenders]

When other Yellowjackets fans, majority who are poc themselves, talk about how weird and frustrating it is that the writers introduced a random yte character and gave them a storyline when there were two (technically three but they killed off Lottie even when there was an opportunity for more) woc, who have been around since s1, that could've fit the mold instead (like Mari) and have actual personalities outside of building up/being the lapdog for another character. Or how often times many of the, limited, poc characters are often either treated poorly and killed off, or pushed to the side (Simone, reduced to the disposable black girlfriend trope and is nearly killed by her partner because she's in the way of a ship; Travis, since s1, had his trauma dismissed or ignored and was overly hated but no one talks about how he was SA'd by the girls he's now stuck with on top of having to eat his brother and not be able to grieve over it). How Taissa's whole storyline is just revolving around Van even with all the potential, especially given she's fighting to be free from her own mind, how Lottie's mental illness is treated so poorly as if it's not the butt of a joke then it's met with heavy criticism (and the only time she is met with sympathy for it, it's through the lens of a yte character embodying her and having an emotional conversation with her father). How you can have all of these reasons (and more) for being annoyed by Melissa's character or the direction of the show, and be met with #those fans downplaying these concerns, or just being overly antagonistic just because they find yte character #243 entertaining so obviously these conversations don't have merit. But this fandom has always had an...."interesting" way in which it discussed the poc characters on the show, so I'm not surprised.

[torchickentacos]

I've probably said this before at some point but Gary Oak has such 'maroon honda civic owner' vibes to me

[yallthemwitches]

Like a lot of other authors/content creators in the HP fandom, I am feeling a sense of heaviness over the rulings that happened in the UK and feel the need to speak on my (albeit very complicated) feelings.

What JKR is doing is terrible. It will ruin lives. It will end lives.

If you feel like that is being hyperbolic, please go look up the suicide rates for the trans community. It's a staggering number and it only grows as people seeking information, comfort, and support are locked out of proper resources due to heinous legislations like the one passed yesterday.

It saddens me too because I know that so many in the LGBTIQA+ have found characters/stories in the HP universe that have spoken to them and helped to understand their personal journeys---only to have that comfort ripped away by the very person who created them.

If you can permit me to be personal for a second: My brother is trans and before/during his transition (this was early 2010s) he always cited Remus Lupin as one of the foundations for coming to terms with his trans identity because he saw some of his own internal struggle in Lupin's character. He even went so far as to write a letter to JKR (which, thank GOD he never sent...) thanking her for creating a character that aided him with the complicated feelings he had when there were no other resources for him.

My brother is now a psychologist specializing in the young trans community and speaking to him recently, he has said that he comes across this same story constantly and each one ends in tragedy because that little piece of solace and comfort was not just taken from them, but told them that no, actually. You thought wrong to see yourself in this character. You don't matter.

Watching what happened yesterday and knowing the long history of bigotry JKR has spouted for years now weighs heavy on my heart every time I step into this fandom and often I question if I should still contribute to it. I know it's not much, but I would like to share some of the things that keep me going--even when it all looks really fucking bleak:

Fanfiction and fanart are, at their foundation, anticapitalist works--and can be used to fight JKR's agenda. By consuming fanfic/fanart zero money goes towards JKR. None. And further, JKR has no say in how you use her characters in these spaces. So, if you want to use these creative outlets to uplift trans voices, please do! Support trans writers/artists and urge them to PERSIST--because I promise you nothing is going to tick off the ole' bitch more than trans bodies/ trans supporters writing her characters.

Just because the writer is the devil, doesn't mean the art has to be. I won't go into the concept of "death of the author" because I think it can be pockmarked to hell with various examples, but what I DO subscribe to is that once the art is out in the world, it is now owned by the person who consumes it. To put it simply: when I read HP I am POSITIVE I imagine characters/settings differently than the person next to me. It's the beauty of the imagination: the creator can give us the blocks but how it is built is contingent on how WE perceive it.

Did I mention money? DON'T GIVE IT TO HER. Buy the books/movies second hand. Pirate the media you wish to consume around the fandom. Don't give her any reason to give any more hate funding and instead send that money to trans communities and groups who need it (they REALLY need it.)

Maybe I'm naive to say this, but I don't think interacting with the story as an art form is bad. She invented it, sure, but she isn't in charge of what goes on in my brain. If anything, this fandom NEEDS the trans community and supporters within it because not only can they push back, but they can educate those who otherwise are listening to the author. Don't let her win the space even though she's the author. It's no longer hers to have.

If you are someone who wants to leave the fandom because you can't bear to watch her continue to destroy it--I completely understand. But, as someone who has been in this fandom for over 20 years, the one thing I've learned is: besides monetarily she doesn't own shit. Don't let her take what you love from you and don't let her get away with scaring people out of their community spaces. Support and love our trans brothers and sisters and enjoy your HP despite it all. The things you love are worth fighting for.

[thoughtkick]

If you feel lost, you just have to start trying anything and everything. Only action brings change. You can't just sit there and overthink it.

Tai Lopez

[endlesslyhyperfixating]

Who else is curious about the ASL sign for "sorry" and who Carmy's old chefs were?.

"it's uhm, 'i'm sorry.' In sign. Uh, two of my old chefs used to do it. You know, if they were angry, fighting on the line, it helped. It was like their version of 'lets talk about this later'"

I think it'd be really nice and cool to hear and see those two chefs and their affect on Carmy so heavy that he adopted their actions into his own instinctual reactions in such a personal tender moment with Syd.

Let's be real, in the restaurant he's not the one to initiate the "sorry" first (with the exception of when Syd was upset he didn't call her to tell her about the beef/the bears renovations) So for him to want to initiate this action mostly/only when they're alone and a bit more personal should mean something more.

We all know the importance of the sorry ASL sign for them, but I think maybe looking into the background of it some more would give us even more insight and idea to what it really means to him to do it with Syd, and only Syd.

[ultimatelyangel]

taylor's chai cookie recipe!!

[one-real-wrimonkey]

Taiyang Xiao Long is a bad parent.

Tai is a pretty bad dad. Not Jacques Schnee, but there’s some real issues to be considered. Some of his reasons for this are understandable, not necessarily his fault and it doesn’t make him a bad person, but it does make him a bad parent. And yes he loves his daughters and they love him, but that doesn’t mean he wasn’t not a bad parent.

For one: the parentification of Yang.

When Summer dies he is paralysed by grief. It’s said he just shuts down, and this does happen. Grief does that and hits different people differently. None the less, Yang was younger than ten and looking after herself, Ruby and probably him as well. Not to mention she sneaks off with Ruby to find Raven and they would have died if Qrow hadn’t saved them. Yang was left picking up the pieces after Summer died.

Yang still has trauma from this, and from (as is implied) continuing to be a key figure and parent in Ruby’s life. Ruby mentions several times that Yang raised her (as well as them both referring to Qrow as a role model and mentor more than Taiyang). Yang did a lot of raising herself and raising her sister when she was a child herself. Its very heavily implied that even once he was past his grief, he had stepped back as a parent and was very busy with his teaching.

Again, and I cannot emphasise this enough, it’s not necessary his fault and it doesn’t make him evil, but it still had impacts on his kids that lasted to adulthood. It was still bad parenting.

For two: staying in Patch.

This one annoys me more.

When Ruby left to go to Haven and he didn’t go after her, that made sense, Yang still needed help and Qrow was able to go after her. Fine.

But then Yang left. Yang went after Ruby and Qrow, and he stayed behind. Knowing about Salem, knowing what was at Haven, knowing what was at risk, he didn’t go after his kids or help, he stayed behind. Despite having been a part of Ozpin’s inner circle, despite knowing what these kids, his kids, are heading towards, he stayed at home.

And before anyone says ‘he’s retired’ or ‘he’s a teacher’ it’s mentioned he was a teacher and it makes sense that Summer died he chose to stay home and be with the kids. However, once the kids are both at Beacon he starts taking missions again. And this is fate of the world stuff. He could have gone with them, but he stayed in Patch with his gardening and his sunflowers. Yet again, it seems he’s happy to leave his kids to manage themselves, this is a reoccurring pattern.

In conclusion:

He loves his daughters, and they love him. He tries to do what’s best for them, however, his actions had a lasting negative impact on his daughters. He neglects them in his grief and leaves his eldest to raise his youngest and it’s suggested several times that even when he recovers from his grief, this pattern of behaviour continues. He is a good person, a huntsman, and loves his kids, but he’s still a bad parent.

And it makes him a very interesting character. I think this is better than a two dimensional ‘good parent’. It drives and influences Ruby and Yang as people, somewhat influences Qrow, shapes all their relationships. It’s a very real, messy family dynamic.

TLDR- he loves his kids but his actions negatively impact them in ways that last into adulthood. They’re a messy family, they do love each other, but even considering outside factors, the end result is that he was a bad parent to Yang and Ruby.

[eli-evermore]

the unholy trio

I just listened to her new song today, and literally, I can not stop seeing yellowjackets references in it. please help me</3

[artbyfuji]

crazy way to find out 🤯

[alicentsgf]

Sorry people can clown on Sophie Nelisse about certain other things but this Variety quote? she gets it better than 90% of the audience